America is great and everything is NOT Pres. Trump's fault thread

[Stoked]

What exactly has been a life preserver?

And it's actually you who seems to be frothing.

Care to tell us what your job is and how Trump relates to your newly secure financial position?

I just explained it. If you don’t like the answer that’s your problem.

Me? For this one moment, sure. But you’ll be here saying the same **** every day for the next 2 years.

RAWR. LOUD NOISES.

 

[str8line]

I just explained it. If you don’t like the answer that’s your problem.

Me? For this one moment, sure. But you’ll be here saying the same **** every day for the next 2 years.

RAWR. LOUD NOISES.

You seem stressed.

 

[Stoked]

Oversaturation anyone?

Americans have the attention span of a 3 year old. Pick your moments.

Smfh

 

[Stoked]

You seem stressed.

I’m EXTREMELY ****ing stressed. What was your first clue. But that deflection has zero bearing on my point.

 

[str8line]

I’m EXTREMELY ****ing stressed. What was your first clue. But that deflection has zero bearing on my point.

Maybe you should take a break and recognize that in the long run there is nothing he could do that can outweigh the bad. And at the risk of sounding like a broken record I will continue to call him out. You're welcome to tune me out.

And I'm sorry that your stressed. For real. I like you.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

lol fact?

2008 was caused by the government telling the banks something.

look let's say you have lots of money.
2 white people come to me.
1 is a single parent with 5 children. who dropped out of highschool
and the other is a family man, is married has a wive with 2 kids. and has a small bussines

those 2 people come to me for a loan, you want in the end your loan to be paid back. we are not talking charity here! because we know which one can uses the charity! but business wise. which one is usally more likely to pay back the loan! not syaing the single mom 5 kids no education cant pay it back but it is LESS LIKELY.

ok, so banks/business(not charities) make risk assesment on how likely it is 1 person might pay back a loan. thye have different criteria. somehow clinton adminsitration thought it was racist, because 1 of criteria is stable family other was stable income and some where level of education. so clintons decide dthis was a racist thing to do. and forced the bank to give out more loans. so within this new law, ofcourse banks know they will lose ****. so they lobby for ridiculous things in the law. so they get some kind of protection. it is only normal

after all if i force you to lend money to everyone, you will want something in return so you dont risk losing your money.

ok so now lots of people got loans. so there is this thing socialist dont understand it is called supply and demand. now that more and more people could get loans. demand for houses went up! demand goes up prices go up. this demand is unnatural and caused by the governmetn so it is unsustainable. so now the housing prices are skyhigh,, people start defaulting on loans. that coupled with OTHER influences. caused the 2008 crash


FACT IS GOVERNMENT REGULATION CAUSED THAT CRASH. i know it's a bit complicated and technical for you to understand simple **** like risk management and supply and demand etc etc etc. but these are facts

Pure truth. I was in this industry at the time. This is exactly what happened.

 

[Zombie]

@Stoked

Look man I know you are no fan of Trump, and aren't defending him right now, but for me and probably more than a few other posters here each day he is in office is like a living nightmare. Posting here and elsewhere is more about venting and emoting than it is about trying to change anyone's minds. At this point if people can't see him for what he is, or our country for what it is, it's highly unlikely anything we say here is going to change that.

So maybe just let us vent without berating us for it.

 

[str8line]

 

[Stoked]

@Stoked

Look man I know you are no fan of Trump, and aren't defending him right now, but for me and probably more than a few other posters here each day he is in office is like a living nightmare. Posting here and elsewhere is more about venting and emoting than it is about trying to change anyone's minds. At this point if people can't see him for what he is, or our country for what it is, it's highly unlikely anything we say here is going to change that.

So maybe just let us vent without berating us for it.

Haven’t we for days and weeks and months?

But fine. Circle jerk away of it makes you feel better.

**** this anyways.

 

[Zombie]

Haven’t we for days and weeks and months?

But fine. Circle jerk away of it makes you feel better.

**** this anyways.

I mean, what's the point of a circle jerk otherwise?

 

[Stoked]

Two things.

1. Overkill

2. Sorry, no details but my post about me being stressed was being gentle about it. The primary reason I stepped down as a mod.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

So much for your thread, @Heathme.

 

[Getting Traded]

So much for your thread, @Heathme.

So what's your proof that the government told lenders to give the loans to unqualified persons?

The quote below shows that the loans to average citizens were handled more conservatively and that it was the big banks that were less regulated that caused the problems. Alan Greenspan, Fed Chair at the time, stated this during his hearing before Congress:

The non-depository system grew to exceed the size of the regulated depository banking system,[4] but the investment banks, insurers, hedge funds, and money market funds were not subject to the same regulations. Many of these institutions suffered the equivalent of a bank run,[5] with the notable collapses of Lehman Brothers and AIG during September 2008 precipitating a financial crisis and subsequent recession.[6]

The government also repealed or implemented several laws that limited the regulation of the banking industry, such as the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and implementation of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. The former allowed depository and investment banks to merge while the latter limited the regulation of financial derivatives . . . GSE (government-sponsored enterprise) loans were less risky and performed better than loans securitized by more lightly regulated Wall Street banks.[8] They also suggest that CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) loans mandated by the government performed better than subprime loans that were purely market-driven.[7][8] They also present data which suggests that financial firms that lobbied the government most aggressively also had the riskiest lending practices, and lobbied for relief from regulations that were limiting their ability to take greater risks.[8] In testimony before Congress both the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Alan Greenspan claimed failure in allowing the self-regulation of investment banks.[10][11]Further, the five largest investment banks at the core of the crisis (including Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers) were not subject to the CRA or other depository banking regulations, and they did not originate mortgages.[12][1]

The point of this is that capitalism needs regulation and if it's unbridled -- Reagan began the era of deregulation -- we get the mess we are in now with the divergence between rich and poor continually growing and a small elite group of billionaires, like the Koch Brothers, controlling everything and growing richer by the day.

 

[str8line]

So much for your thread, @Heathme.

What do you think of the video I just posted, JB? Should we be praising Trump for the economy instead? Can we praise Trump in light of what the gentleman said?

 

[DutchJazzer]

Oh, so DJ doesn't believe in democracy.

the way you say it sounds bad! look i dont believe you get to vote on my healthcare. you dont get to vote on the money in my pocket. you dont get to vote on forcing me to stand during anthem or to bake a cake!

you see i believe in a constituional republic.

let me simplify it for you

imagine a boat with 100 people!
now a theocracy would be 51 of those people. voting on throwing you overboard for the sharks. or voting to take your stuff.
and since the majority voted. you got to say nothing your stuff is taken or your thrown overboard.

now a republic is the same situation but this time 51 55 60 70 even if every single person except you voted. they cant take your property and you cant be thrown over board! because you that violates your basic rights. not talking about made up rights like healthcare education etc.

i want to live my live free from the majorities decision! if i walk up to a doctor i dont want you vote involved!
oi want to be free to live my live. live and let live. in return i let you live free from my "stupid" worldview"


so there you have it/.


as for the tulip crash. it wasnt totally unregulated. but close to.
but yeah whats wrong with a market crash it is natural and inevitable. but when it crashes the people who made wrong/bad decision pay for it. and so they did. now the taxpayers pay for these crashes. see the difference. repsonoisbilty amnd consequences are for those people.

so you see with the lending situation where the bank forces you to lend money to risky peole who are less likely to pay it back. the responsibilty for being cautious when lending is taking away. so the consequences are also taken byu government. so the taxpayers pay. when their is no repsonsibitly and consequences people tend to do stupid hshit. and not learn from their mistakes

 

[str8line]

Two things.

1. Overkill

2. Sorry, no details but my post about me being stressed was being gentle about it. The primary reason I stepped down as a mod.

Stoked, I'm genuinely concerned for you and I'm not here to add to your stress levels. Yet can there be overkill when standing up against a tyrant? This is happening. It's been in the cards for a while and Trump is getting what he wants. Our populace has been beaten down by his incessant invective to the point where not even our leaders will stand up to him. How much more do we need to see to prove that he is a megalomaniac with blood on his hands?

 

[Getting Traded]

the way you say it sounds bad! look i dont believe you get to vote on my healthcare. you dont get to vote on the money in my pocket. you dont get to vote on forcing me to stand during anthem or to bake a cake!

you see i believe in a constituional republic.

let me simplify it for you

imagine a boat with 100 people!
now a theocracy would be 51 of those people. voting on throwing you overboard for the sharks. or voting to take your stuff.
and since the majority voted. you got to say nothing your stuff is taken or your thrown overboard.

now a republic is the same situation but this time 51 55 60 70 even if every single person except you voted. they cant take your property and you cant be thrown over board! because you that violates your basic rights. not talking about made up rights like healthcare education etc.

i want to live my live free from the majorities decision! if i walk up to a doctor i dont want you vote involved!
oi want to be free to live my live. live and let live. in return i let you live free from my "stupid" worldview"


so there you have it/.


as for the tulip crash. it wasnt totally unregulated. but close to.
but yeah whats wrong with a market crash it is natural and inevitable. but when it crashes the people who made wrong/bad decision pay for it. and so they did. now the taxpayers pay for these crashes. see the difference. repsonoisbilty amnd consequences are for those people

Not sure I understand the logic of your thinking. Sure we have basic rights and in a democratic government they can't be taken away, no matter how many people want to do that. But in an authoritarian government, they can take away everything without any say from you, even your life, as Hitler did.

 

[Red]

Steve Schmidt is the best. Always delivers the truth of the matter with utmost clarity. I guess the fact that he's a former Republican strategist adds some weight, but, really, it's just his ability to spell the situation right out in the clearest possible terms that makes him stand out in my estimation. I always look forward to his take, and the force with which he delivers the truth of the matter.

 

[DutchJazzer]

Not sure I understand the logic of your thinking. Sure we have basic rights and in a democratic government they can't be taken away, no matter how many people want to do that. But in an authoritarian government, they can take away everything without any say from you, even your life, as Hitler did.

of course you dont understand.

in USA you have freedom of speech, and unlike popular believe their is no such thing as hate speech. in the EU it is different. but if the trend continues with this "belief" that their is such a thing a shate speech. if the left has it's way it will be a thing.

in a true republic. you do not get to vote on how i use my vocal cords. you do not get to vote to force me to spend money on healthcare. you do not get to vote to take my money to educate people with my money on your beliefs that go counter against mine! that is the definition of authoritarian. i am minding my own business and you are infringing on me! that is what eventually every government grows into!


and when you impose hate speech laws. you are hiding the truth from me.

take for example you have a nieghbour he is a national socialist, and he wants to plant his national socialist flag he bought with HIS money, With his labor and plant in on HIS property! as a jew who lost 8 branches of my family tree in the holocaust i dont want to see that flag. but my neighbour can plant that flag on his property all he wants. maybe i will build a higher wall.
if he is not allowed to plant them(in usa you can have nazi flags, in eu you can not under special reggulation like museums movie studios etc are allowed) he will still be a naiotnal socialist. but i will never know. so not only did the governemtn(aka the voters) decide to take away rights of my nieghbour. they also took my right away from knowing the turh about my neighbour.

there is this grey area call to action.
for example me and 5 friends talking and planning to rob a bank. maybe we are joking maybe it is a thought excercise maybe it is a real plan. nothing can be done. but the moment 1 starts laying his hand on the guns, 1 the getaway car. 1 on blueprints for the bank. then maybe it's time to put them on trial.

so in short my neighbour should be able to plant his nationalist socialist flag. but when he gets to gether and start building an oven. investigate why he is building the oven. maybe it;'s just a microwvae for drying wood. maybe he ha splans to throw my jew *** into it.

the way the democrats see democracy is sadly the authoritroian way our way when we have majority and in peach orange man when it goes against them.

 

[DutchJazzer]

So what's your proof that the government told lenders to give the loans to unqualified persons?

it was called the community reinvestment act!
i hope you accept a time link. if not go research community reinvestment act.
this is a quote from time magazine

In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877322,00.html.

to be fair to Clinton it was introduced in 1977 by other democrat governments. but clinton put way more presure, and loosened the requirments for the loan!